Table Of ContentThe Project Gutenberg EBook of The Negro: what is His Ethnological Status?
2nd Ed., by Buckner H. 'Ariel' Payne
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: The Negro: what is His Ethnological Status? 2nd Ed.
Author: Buckner H. 'Ariel' Payne
Release Date: February 17, 2010 [EBook #31302]
Language: English
Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE NEGRO: HIS ETHNOLOGICAL STATUS? ***
Produced by Bryan Ness, Graeme Mackreth and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from scanned images of public domain
material from the Google Print project.)
THE NEGRO:
WHAT IS HIS ETHNOLOGICAL STATUS?
IS HE THE PROGENY OF HAM? IS HE A DESCENDANT OF ADAM AND EVE?
HAS HE A SOUL? OR IS HE A BEAST IN GOD'S NOMENCLATURE? WHAT IS
HIS STATUS AS FIXED BY GOD IN CREATION? WHAT IS HIS RELATION TO
THE WHITE RACE?
BY ARIEL.
"Truth, though sometimes slow in its power, is like itself, always
consistent; and like its AUTHOR, will always be triumphant.
The Bible is true."
SECOND EDITION.
CINCINNATI:
PUBLISHED FOR THE PROPRIETOR.
1867.
(Copyright secured according to law.)
THE NEGRO.
What is his Ethnological Status? Is he the progeny of Ham? Is he a descendant of Adam and Eve? Has he a
Soul? or is he a Beast, in God's nomenclature? What is his Status as fixed by God in creation? What is his
relation to the White race?
The intelligent will see at once, that the question of slavery,either right or wrong, is not involved in this caption for
examination: nor is that question discussed. The points are purely ethnological and Biblical, and are to be settled alone
by the Bible and by concurrent history, and by facts existing outside of the Bible and of admitted truth. We simply say in
regard to ourself, in this day of partisan strife, religious and political, that we take no part in any such party strife, and
that it is many years since we cast our last vote. This much, to prevent evil surmises.
With this understood independence of all parties, we begin by saying, that the errors and mistakes, in understanding the
true position of the negro, as God intended it to be in his order of creation, are all traceable to, and arise out of two
assumptions. The learned men of the past and present age, the clergy and others have assumed as true:
1. That the negro is a descendant of Ham, the youngest son of Noah. This is false and untrue.
2. That the negro is a descendant of, or the progeny of, Adam and Eve. This is also false and untrue.
These questions, or rather these assumptions, of the learned and unlearned world, are Biblical, and are to be settled by
the Bible alone, whether they be true or false, and by outside concurrent history—and of facts known to exist, and
admitted to be true by the intelligent, and as they may serve to elucidate any statement or account given in the Bible.
We shall have frequent use of the term, "logic of facts," and now explain what we mean by it. It is this: If one sees
another with a gun in his hands, and that he shoots a man and kills him, and the bullet is found afterward in the dead
man's body, that although we did not see the bullet put into the gun, yet we know by this "logic of facts," that it was in
the gun. It is the strongest evidence of what is true, of any testimony that can be offered.
It will be admitted by all, and contradicted by none, that we now have existing on earth, two races of men, the white
and the black. We beg here to remind our readers, that when they see the word men, or man, italicised, we do not use
it as applying to Adam and his race. But we may sometimes use these words in the general and accepted sense of them,
but it is only for the purpose of getting before the minds of our readers, the propositions of the learned of this age,
exactly as they would wish them to be stated. We will now describe, ethnologically, the prominent characteristics and
differences of these two races as we now find them.
The white race have long, straight hair, high foreheads, high noses, thin lips, and white skins: the olive and sunburnt
color, where the other characteristics are found, belong equally to the white race.
The negro or black race, are woolly or kinky-headed, low foreheads, flat noses, thick-lipped, and have a black skin.
This description of the two races is (though not all their differences), full enough for the fair discussion of their respective
stations in God's order of creation, and will be admitted to be just and true, as far as it goes, by all candid and learned
men. Therefore the reader will observe, that when either of the terms, white, black or negro, is used, referring to race,
that we refer to the one or the other, as the case may be, as is here set forth in describing the two races.
In God's nomenclature of the creation, his order stands thus: 1. Birds; 2. Fowls; 3. Creeping things; 4. Cattle; 5. Beasts;
6. Adam and Eve. We shall use this, but without any intended disparagement to any, as it is the best and highest
authority.
Before proceeding with the examination of the subjects involved in the caption to this paper, we will for a moment,
notice the prevailing errors, now existing in all their strength, and held by the clergy, and many learned men, to be true,
which are: 1. Ham's name, which they allege, in Hebrew, means black; 2. The curse denounced against him, that a
servant of servants should he be unto his brethren; and that this curse, was denounced against Ham, for the accidental
seeing of his father Noah naked—that this curse was to do so, and did change him, so that instead of being long,
straight-haired, high forehead, high nose, thin lips and white, as he then was, and like his brothers Shem and Japheth, he
was from that day forth, to be kinky-headed, low forehead, thick lipped and black skinned; and that his name, and this
curse, effected all this. And truly, to answer their assumptions, it must have done so, or the case would not fit the negro,
as we now find him. And they adduce in proof, that Ham's name in Hebrew (tCHam), means black, the present color
of the negro, and that therefore Ham is the progenitor of the black race. They seem to forget, or rather, they ignore the
fact, that the Bible nowhere says, that such a curse, or that any curse whatever, was denounced against Ham by his
father Noah; but that this curse, with whatever it carried with it, was hurled at Canaan, the youngest son of Ham. But it
is of little consequence, in the settlement of these great questions, which was intended, whether Ham or his youngest
son Canaan. But if it be of any value in supporting their theory, this meaning of Ham's name in Hebrew, in designating
his color to be black, and black it must be, to answer the color of the negro, then the names of Shem and Japheth
should be of equal value, in determining their color; for each of the brothers received their respective names a hundred
years or more before the flood, and were all the children of the same father and same mother. Now, if Shem and
Japheth's names do not describe their color (which they do not), upon what principles of logical philology or grammar,
can Ham's name determine his color? How many of this day are there who are called, black, white, brown, and olive,
[Pg 3]
[Pg 4]
[Pg 5]
all of whom are white, and without the slightest suspicion, that the name indicated the color of their respective owners.
Is it not strange, that intelligent and learned men, should be compelled to rely on such puerilities, as arguments and truly
supporting such tremendous conclusions? But they say it was his name in conjunction with the curse, that made him and
his descendants the negro we now find on earth. It is an axiom in logic, that, that which is not in the constituent, can not
be in the constituted. We have seen, that the making of Ham a negro, is not in the name, which is one of the
constituents, now let us see, if it is in the other constituent, the curse. Now the curse and name changed Ham, if their
theory be true, from a white man, to a black negro. If the curse, were capable of effecting such results, it is to be found
in the word curse, and not in the words, that a servant of servants should he be, as he and his descendants could, as
readily be servants, white as black, and he was already white, and no necessity to make him black, to be a servant. If
this effect on Ham, is to be found in the word curse, it will then be necessary, for the advocates of the assumption, to
show, that such were its usual results, whenever that word was used; for unless such were its common effects, when
used by God himself, by men of God, by patriarchs and by prophets, then we ask, on what grounds, if any there be, it
is, that they assert, that it did produce this effect, in this instance, by Noah on Ham and his descendants? We do not
question or doubt, that Canaan, was denounced in the curse, pronounced by Noah, that he should be a servant of
servants; but whether Ham or Canaan alone is meant, is not material to the questions at issue, except in this view; but
the advocates of such being its effect, must show, that such, at least was its effect previous to, and after Noah used it;
and if they fail in this, that necessarily, this part of their argument is also a total failure. Let us look into the Bible. God
cursed our first parents. Did this curse kink their hair, flatten their skulls, blacken their skin and flatten their nose? If it
did, then Noah was sadly mistaken and these gentlemen too, in supposing that it was Noah's curse, that accomplished
all this, for it was already done for the whole race—and long before, by God himself. God cursed the serpent. Did the
curse produce this effect on him? He cursed Cain—did it affect his skin, his hair, his forehead, his nose or his lips?
These curses were all pronounced by God himself and produced no such effects. But we proceed and take up the holy
men of God, the patriarchs and prophets, and see what their curses produced. Did the curse of Jacob, produce this
effect on Simeon and Levi? did it produce this effect on the man who would make a graven image? did it produce this
effect on the man who would rebuild Jericho? did it produce this effect on those, who maketh the blind to wander out of
the way? did it produce this effect on those, who perverteth the judgment of the stranger, the fatherless and the widow?
Cum multis aliis. It did not. But if it did produce this effect in these cases, then when we read, that Christ died to
redeem us from the curse, are we to understand, that he died to redeem us from a kinky head, flat nose, thick lips and a
black skin? But such curses, never having produced such effects, when pronounced by God, by patriarch, by prophet,
or by any holy man of God before or since, then we inquire to know, on what principles of interpretation, grammar or
logic it is, that it can so mean in this case of Noah? There are no words in the curse, that express, or even imply such
effects. Then in the absence of all such effects, following such curses, and as they are narrated in the Bible, whether
pronounced by God or man; and there being nothing in the language beside to sustain it, and if true, Ham's posterity
must be shown now, as its truthful witnesses, from this, our day, back to the flood or to Ham; and which can not be
done—and if this can not be done, then all arguments and assertions, based on such assumptions, that Ham was the
father of the negro or black race, are false; and if false, then the negro is in no sense, the descendant of Ham; and
therefore, he must have been in the ark, and as he was not one of Noah's family, that he must have entered it in some
capacity, or relation to the other beasts or cattle. For that he did enter the ark is plain from the fact, that he is now here,
and not of the family or progeny of Ham. And no one has ever suspicioned either Shem or Japheth of being the father of
the negro; therefore he must have come out of the ark, and he could not come out, unless he had previously entered it;
and if he entered it, that he must have existed before the flood, and that, too, just such negro as we have now, and
consequently not as a descendant of Adam and Eve; and if not the progeny of Adam and Eve, that he is inevitably a
beast, and as such, entered the ark, though having the form of man, and man he is, being so named by Adam. Such is
the logic, and such are the conclusions to which their premises lead, if legitimately carried out; and by which it is plainly
seen, that the position assumed by the learned of the present and past ages—that the present negroes are the
descendants of Ham, and were made so by his name, or by the curse of his father—is false in fact, and but an
unwarranted assumption at best. But while this conclusion is inevitable, it also reveals to us another sad fact, that the
good men of our own race (the white), though learned and philanthropic, exhibit a weakness, alas! too common in this
our day, that anything they wish to believe or think will be popular, that it is very easy to convert the greatest
improbabilities into the best grounds of their faith. The word used by God, used by patriarch and by prophet, is the
same word used by Noah. If the word thus used by God, and by holy men, did not produce the effect as is charged by
these men, how can the same word, when used by Noah, do it? And yet, on these assumptions, the faith of more than
half the world seems to be now based. To expose these cobweb fabrics, called by some reason, on this subject, and
Christian philanthropy by others, in which are involved, such tremendous conclusions, for weal or for wo, of so large a
portion of the biped creation, that we feel like apologizing to our readers, for answering such learned ignorance,
blindness or weakness. But the meaning of Ham's name in Hebrew is not primarily black. Its primary meaning is: 1.
Sunburnt; 2. swarthy; 3. dark; 4. black—and its most unusual meaning.
Having now disposed of these fancies, for they are nothing better, of the effects of Ham's name, and Noah's curse, in
making him a negro; and having examined them, for the purpose of allowing on what flimsy grounds this mightiest of
structures of air-built theories rests, and for this purpose only, as what we have said about them is not connected with,
nor germain to the way we intend to pursue, in investigating the questions forming the caption to this paper. But having
now disposed of them, we take up our own subject. The reader will bear in mind the description we have given
respectively of the white and black races.
The first question to which we now invite attention is: Do the characteristics which we have given of the white race,
[Pg 6]
[Pg 7]
[Pg 8]
belong equally, to all three of the sons of Noah—Shem, Ham and Japheth, and their descendants? If they do, then the
black race, belong to, and have since the flood at least, belonged to another and totally different race of men.
Now to our question: Do the characteristics, which we have given of the white race, belong equally to the three sons of
Noah and their descendants alike? We will begin with Noah himself first. The Bible says of Noah, that he was perfect in
his generation. We will not stop to criticise the Hebrew translated "generation," for any English scholar on reading the
verse in which it occurs, will see at once, that to make sense, it should have been genealogy. Then Noah was perfect in
his genealogy—he was a preacher of righteousness—he was the husband of one wife, who was also perfect in her
genealogy; by this one wife, he had three sons, all born about one hundred years before the flood, and all three of them
married, before the flood, to women who were perfect also in their genealogies. Ordinarily speaking, this little statement
of facts, undenied by all, and undeniable, would settle at least this question, that whatever the color of one might be,
the others would be the same color—if one were black, all would be black—if one were white, all would be white. Out
of this arises the question, what was the color of these three brothers—were they and their descendants black or white?
We will begin with Shem, so as to find his race now on earth, to see if they are white or black. The Bible tells us where
he went, and where his descendants settled, and what countries they occupied, until the days of our Saviour, who was
of Shem's lineage after the flesh. From the days of the Saviour down to the present day, we see the Jews, the
descendants of Shem, in every country, and see they belong to the white race, which none will pretend to deny—that
they were so before, and after the flood, and have continued to be so to the present time, is unquestionably true. We
know then, on Biblical authority, with mathematical certainty, that they are not negroes, either before, at, nor since the
flood, but white.
We next take up Japheth. We know where he went, and what countries his descendants peopled, with equal certainty
and on equal authority—and all outside concurrent history, equally clearly prove, that Japheth's descendants peopled
Europe, whence they have spread over all the world. That they too belong to the white race, is also unquestioned, nor
doubted by any that have eyes to see. That they were so before, and at the flood, and not negroes then, nor since, is
equally undoubted and indisputable. We have not taken the trouble of showing step by step, where those two brothers
went, and what countries they peopled seriatim, because they are admitted by all, learned and unlearned, to be and to
have done just what is here stated in spreading over the world. It was, therefore, unnecessary to incumber this paper,
by proving that which none disputes. This being so, then two of the three brothers, are known certainly, to be of the
white race, and not of the negro, either before or after the flood.
We now take up the youngest brother, Ham. The evidence establishing the fact, that he too, and his descendants
belong to the white race, with long, straight hair, high forehead, high noses and thin lips, is if possible still stronger, than
that of either of his brothers; if indeed anything can, in human conception, be stronger than that, which is of perfect
strength, and if this is true, then Ham can not be the father of the negro. As in the cases of the other two brothers, the
Bible tells us where Ham, and his descendants went, and what countries they peopled, and where his race may be
found at this day; and which likewise, all contemporaneous history abundantly testifies, and shows that they are of the
white race, and were so before the flood, and from the flood continued so, and yet continue so to the present time; and
that not one of them, is of the negro race of this day. We will, in establishing the truths of the above declarations, take
up two of Ham's sons and trace them and their descendants, from the flood to the present time, and show what they
were, and what they are down to this day. These two sons of Ham, whose posterity we propose to trace, and show
that they now belong to the white race, are Mizraim and Canaan, the second and the youngest of his sons. The families
of all of the sons can be traced from the flood to the present day, but we presume two are sufficient, and that they be
white; and we have selected Canaan intentionally and for a purpose that will be seen hereafter. Canaan was
denounced by Noah, that he should be a servant of servants to his brethren, and if it turns out, in this investigation, as
we know it will, that they belong to the white race, it will satisfactorily settle this question, that the curse of Noah did
not make him and his descendants the black negro we now find on earth, much less Ham, who was not so cursed. The
Bible plainly tells us, that the country now called Egypt, was settled by Mizraim, the second son of Ham, and was
peopled by his descendants; that Mizraim, the second son of Ham, and grandson of Noah, gave his name to the
country; that they called it the land of Mizraim, and by which name it is still known, to the present day, by the
descendants of its ancient inhabitants; that they built many magnificent cities on the Nile—among them, the city of
Thebes, one of the largest and most magnificent in its architecture, and the grandeur of its monuments and temples, the
world ever saw. Its ruins at the present day, are of surpassing magnificence and grandeur. The city was named Thebes,
to commemorate the Ark, that saved Noah, the grandfather of Mizraim, from the flood; the name of the Ark in Hebrew,
being Theba. Then we take it for granted, all will admit, that what is now called Egypt, was settled by Mizraim, the son
of Ham, and grandson of Noah. The Bible, and outside concurrent history, abundantly prove that he and his
descendants, held, occupied and ruled over Egypt, and continued in the possession and the occupancy of the country as
such, until long after the Exodus of the Hebrews, under Moses and Aaron; that Ham's descendants, through Canaan, in
the persons of his sons Sidon and Heth, settled Sidon, Tyre and Carthage. This will not be denied by any intelligent
Biblical student or historian. Sidon itself was named after Canaan's oldest son.
From Egypt in Africa, Mizraim's descendants passed over to Asia, and settled India, whence they spread over that
continent; that great commerce sprung up between India, etc., and Egypt and connecting countries, which was carried
on by caravans; that Greece and Rome subsequently, shared largely in this commerce, especially after the march of
Alexander the Great to India, by the caravan route, three hundred and thirty-two years before our Saviour's birth. This
commerce has continued to our day. All these facts are undeniable, and will be denied by none acquainted with the
[Pg 9]
[Pg 10]
[Pg 11]
Bible and past history. These descendants, of this maligned Ham, were at, and after the flood, and continue to be, to
this day, of the white race, all having long, straight hair, high foreheads, high noses and thin lips; that they are so, and as
much so as the descendants of the other two brothers, and possessing all of the same general lineaments—lineaments
that so long as the race shall exist, will be an eternal protest against their being of the negro race that we now have. But
as we intend to show conclusively that Ham and his descendants were and are white, long, straight hair, etc., from
Noah to the present time, so plainly and so positively that no fair or candid man can have the least doubt of its truth,
we proceed to state: That we will now give the names of the country, now called Egypt, beginning with its first
settlement by Mizraim, in regular order down, to enable the Biblical and historical student to refer readily to the histories
of the different epochs, to detect any error, if we should make one, in tracing Ham's descendants, down to the present
day. In Hebrew it is called Mizraim, in Coptic and Arabic (the former being now the name of its ancient or first
inhabitants), it is called Misr or Mezr, being spelled in both these ways by the Arabian and Coptic writers. In Syro-
Chaldaic and Hellenic Greek it is called Aiguptos—and in Latin, Ægyptus. In many of the ancient Egyptian and Coptic
writings it is called Chimi, that is, the land of Ham, and is so called in the Bible, see Psalms cv, 23; cvi, 22, and other
places. The ancient inhabitants now in Egypt, the Copts, are called the posterity of Pharaoh, by the Turks of the
present day. The ancient Hyksos, or shepherd kings (patriarchs) of the Hebrews, are sometimes confounded in ancient
history, with the descendants of Ham, being of the same original stock. Egypt has not had a ruler of its own since the
battle of Actium, fought by Augustus Caesar, thirty years before our Saviour, as God by his prophet had foretold that
their own kings would cease forever to reign over that country. After the battle of Actium, it became a Roman province,
and since that time, it has been under foreign rule. It now is, and has been governed by the Turks since 1517.
It appears (see Asiatic Miscel., p. 148, 4to), that Mizraim, the son of Ham, and his sons (descendants), after settling
Egypt, a portion went to Asia, which was settled by them, and that they gave their names to the different parts of the
country where they settled, and which they retain yet. The names of these sons of Mizraim as given in history are as
follows: Hind, Sind, Zeng, Nuba, Kanaan, Kush, Kopt, Berber and Hebesh, or Abash. From these children of Ham,
we not only readily trace the present names of the countries, but that of the people also to this day; that they founded
the nations of the Indus, Hindoos, Nubians, Koptos, Zanzebar, Barbary, Abysinia, the present Turks, is unquestioned
and undoubted, by any intelligent scholar. That they are the white race, with long, straight hair, etc., is equally
unquestionable, and are so this day, and as positively as that Shem and Japheth's descendants are now white. They first
commenced to settle on the Nile in Africa, they then passed into Asia; and these two continents were principally settled
by them. A portion of Europe (Turkey) is occupied by them—these, too, have long, straight hair, etc.
A portion of Ham's descendants, through Canaan's sons, Sidon and Heth, settled Sidon, Tyre, and later, Carthage.
Tyre became a great power, and a city of much wealth and commerce, as we learn by the Bible and other history. Tyre
was eventually overthrown, and her Queen and people fled. They subsequently built the great city of Carthage, near to
where Tunis, in Africa, is now situated. They were again overthrown and their city destroyed by Scipio Africanus
Secundus, after the battle of Zama. But, during one of the sieges, the city being invested by the Romans, the people
became hard pressed for provisions, to supply which, they resolved on building some ships, to run the blockade for
provisions. But after their ships were built, they had no ropes to rig them, nor anything within the city to make them. In
this dilemma, the ladies, the women of Carthage, to their eternal honor be it spoken, patriotically stepped forward, and
tendered their hair, their long and beautiful tresses, to make the much needed ropes, which was accepted, and a
supply of provisions obtained. Now how many, and what sort of ropes would the kinky-headed negro have furnished,
had the inhabitants been negroes? This noble act of the women of Carthage, is mentioned to their honor, by Babylonian,
Persian, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman and Carthagenian writers and historians; and yet, we have seen it stated, and stated
by learned modern writers, and who ought to have known better, that Hannibal, Hamilcar, Asdrubal, etc., the great
Carthagenian Generals, were kinky-headed negroes—that Carthage itself, was a negro city. Why, the annals of fame
do not present such an array of great names, whether in arts and sciences, and all that serves to elevate and make man
noble on earth, or in the senate, or the field, by any other race of people, as will compare with those of Ham's
descendants. These Carthagenians were all long and straight haired people. After the fall of Carthage, in the last Punic
War, many of its people passed over subsequently into Spain, which they held and occupied for centuries, and are
known in history as Saracens. A part of Spain, they held and occupied, until the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, when
they were expelled. These, too, had long and straight hair, etc. But to return to that portion of Ham's descendants
through Mizraim. These settled Egypt, India, China, and most all of Oriental Asia, where they have continued to live,
and where they yet live, and not one of them is a negro. They all have long, straight hair, etc., peculiar only to the white
race. Not one negro belongs to their race. That this is their history, none will deny.
Ham, the maligned and slandered Ham—Ham who is falsely charged as being the father of the negro—Ham, the son of
the white man Noah—this Ham, and his descendants, the long and straight haired race, it appears from history—from
unquestioned history—governed and ruled the world from the earliest ages after the flood and for many centuries—
and gave to it, all the arts and sciences, manufactures and commerce, geometry, astronomy, geography, architecture,
letters, painting, music, etc., etc.—and that they thus governed the world, as it were, from the flood, until they came in
contact with the Roman people, and then their power was broken in a contest for the mastery of the world, at
Carthage, one hundred and forty-seven years before A.D., and Carthage fell—but fell, not for lack of talents in her
people, not for lack of orators, statesmen and generals of the most consummate abilities, but because God had long
before determined, that the Japhethic race should govern the world; and the Roman people were Japheth's children.
When Hannibal, the most consummate general the world ever saw to his day, fought the battle of Zama, he met a fate
similar to that which befel another equally consummate commander at a later day, on the field of Waterloo—both
[Pg 12]
[Pg 13]
[Pg 14]
became exiles. That Ham's talents, abilities, genius, power, grandeur, glory, should now be attempted to be stolen, and
to be stolen, not by the negro, for he has neither genius or capacity for such a theft, but stolen by the learned men of this
and the past ages, and thrust upon the negro, who has not capacity to understand, when, where, or how, he had ever
performed such feats of legislation, statesmanship, government, arts of war and in science. The negro has been upon the
earth, coeval with the white race. We defy any historian, any learned man, to put his finger on the history, the page, or
even paragraph of history, showing he has ever done one of these things, thus done by the children of Ham; or that he
has shown, in this long range of time, a capacity for self-government, such as Ham, Shem and Japheth. If he has done
anything on earth, in any age of the world, since he has been here, as has been done by the three sons of Noah, in arts
and sciences, government, etc., it surely can be shown; and shown equally as clear and unequivocally, when and
where he did it, as that of Shem, Ham and Japheth can. But such a showing can never be made; that page of history
has never yet been written that records it. On these subjects, his history is as blank as that of the horse or the beaver.
But we are not yet done with Ham's descendants. The great Turko-Tartar generals, Timour, Ghenghis Kahn and
Tamerlane, the latter called in history, the scourge of God—the Saracenic general, the gallant, the daring, the chivalrous,
the noble Saladin, he who led the Paynim forces of Mahomet, against the lion-hearted Richard, in the war of the
Crusades, all, all these were children of Ham. Mahomet himself, the founder of an empire, and the head of a new
religion, made his kingdom of Ham's descendants, as all Turks are: and these all—have straight, long hair, etc. Those
who have read the various histories of the crusades of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, know that the Turkish forces
then, had long, straight hair, etc., and that it is so yet with their descendants none doubt—and these were children of
Ham.
It will be seen now, how we have taken up one of Ham's sons; that we have traced him and his descendants from the
flood to Egypt, where they are still; that we have traced them across the continent of Africa into Asia, settling
countries as they went; and to the countries still bearing their names, where they settled, and where they are yet; that
we have taken up another son, and traced him and his descendants to Sidon, Tyre, Carthage, and Spain, and shown
that they, too, without exception, were long, straight haired, high foreheads, high noses, thin lips, and belong to the
white race. Not a kinky-headed negro among them. We have shown that Ham's descendants have led and governed
the world, for twenty-three centuries after the flood to the battle of Actium; that they gave it, also, the arts and sciences,
manufactures and commerce, etc., etc. There is one discovery, one dye, as old as Tyre itself, and yet eminently noted—
the Tyrian Purple—consecrated exclusively to imperial use. Imperial purple is the synonym of a king, in ancient and
modern history; that we have found these children of the slandered Ham, and have traced them step by step, as it were,
from country to country, from the days of the flood down to the present day; that wherever we found them, and
whenever found, in any day, of any century from Noah down to this day, we have found them white, and of the white
race only. And we now challenge the production of a single history, or a single paragraph of history, showing one
nation—one single nation or kingdom—of kinky-headed, flat-nosed, thick-lipped and black-skinned negroes, that
made such discoveries in arts and sciences, built such cities, had such rulers, kings, and legislators, such generals, such
commerce, and such manufactures, as Mizraim's people on the Nile, or as Ham's children in Tyre, in Carthage, in
Spain, show that they had—we defy its production. But we are not yet done with our proofs about Ham and his
descendants being white.
It seems as if God, foreseeing the slander that would, in after ages, be put, or attempted to be put, on his son Ham, by
ignorant or designing men attempting to show that he was the progenitor of the negro race, directed Mizraim, the
second son of Ham, by an interposition of his power and providence, or by direct inspiration, to put away his dead, by
a process of embalming, the details of which, for the accomplishment of the object, can be regarded as little, if anything,
short of being miraculous; and by which, we can now look into the faces of the children of Mizraim, male and female,
even at this day, in succeeding generations, and from the flood; and which can not be done with the children of Shem
and Japheth, about whose identity with the white race no controversy has ever existed. It was this fact that caused us to
say, that the testimony establishing Ham's identity, as belonging to the white race, was stronger, if possible, than that of
either of his brothers. God foreseeing, as we have said, this atrocious slander, that would be put on Ham and his
posterity, so directed Mizraim, and at once inspired his mind, that from the first, he appeared to be fully acquainted with
all the necessary ingredients, and how to use them, and in what proportions, and how many days were to be consumed
to perfect the corpse, that it would be incorruptible, and thereby become and be forever a testimony of God for Ham,
that should speak to the eyes and senses of all men, in after ages, and proclaiming as they do, to this day, and from the
very time of the flood, and through each successive generation from the flood, that their ancestor, Ham, and they,
his descendants, were like the children of the other brothers, their equal, in all the lineaments that stamp the race of
Adam with the image and likeness of the Almighty, and belonging to the white race. That these mummied witnesses of
Ham, his dead children, speaking from the tombs of ages for their father, and proclaiming from the days of the flood as
they do, by each succeeding generation of his buried ones, down to the present day, and protesting by their long,
straight hair, by their high foreheads, by their high noses, and by their thin lips, now hushed in silence forever, that the
slander, that their father was the progenitor of the negro, was a slander most foul—a slander most infamous. Well
might their indignant bodies be so aroused—well might Ham's children, who have been slumbering for centuries, be so
electrified by these foul aspersions, as to burst their sarcophagii, and tear the cerements of the grave, and this foul
calumny, from their faces at one and the same time and forever. It looks as if God intended, by this overruling or
inspiring of Mizraim, so to embalm his dead, to teach us a lesson, that there was an importance, in being of the white
race, to be attached to it, of grander proportions, and of nobler value, than any earthly, filial or paternal affections that
could be symbolized by it. Millions of these mummied bodies have been exhumed this century, but not one negro has
been found among them. What does this teach? What value do you place on this testimony prepared and ordained by
[Pg 15]
[Pg 16]
[Pg 17]
God himself, as his testimony to the worth of the white race? The writer of this has seen many of these mummies, but
never a negro. He has assisted in unrolling some, and all had straight, long hair. It was his fortune, as it happened, to
assist in unrolling the body of one possessing peculiar interest. From the hieroglyphic inscription on the sarcophagus, it
proved to be the body of a young lady, who died in her seventeenth year, that she was the daughter of the High Priest
of On (the temple of On was situated six miles northeast from the present Cairo), and that she was an attendant of the
princesses of the court of King Thothmes 3d. This king is recognized and believed to be that Pharaoh under whom
Moses and Aaron brought out the children of Israel from Egypt. This mummy we assisted in unrolling. The inner
wrapping next to the skin was of what we now call fine linen cambric. When this was removed, the hair on the head
looked as though it had but recently been done up. It was in hundreds of very small plaits, three-ply, and each from a
yard to a yard and a quarter long; and although she had then been buried 3,338 years, her hair had the apparent
freshness as if she had been dead only a few days or weeks. The face, ears, neck and bosom were guilded; and so
were her hands to above the wrists, and her feet to above the ankles. Such had been the perfect manner of her
embalmment, that the flesh retained its roundness and fullness remarkably, with fine teeth, beautiful mouth, and every
mark by which we could, at this day, recognize her as a beautiful lady of the white race. Without disparagement to our
fair country-women, we can say, that a more beautiful hand, foot and ankle, we never beheld.
Now, what have we proven by this recitement of Bible history—of that of contemporaneous and concurrent history
outside of the Bible—of facts, facts now existing in the mummied remains of Ham's descendants, commencing with
Mizraim and coming down through centuries since the flood—of the yet living nations, comprised unquestionably of
his descendants, and who, like the descendants of Shem and Japheth, have the distinctive marks of the white race
alone, and as clear as either Shem or Japheth, and that, too, as they exist now on earth, and running back as such
from this our day to Noah; and as distinct from the negro race as that race is now distinct from the children of Japheth?
Of that miraculous intervention of divine power, in causing Mizraim so to embalm his children, that they should speak
from the grave, in attestation of their being of the white, and not of the negro, race. Why did God require that only the
children of Ham should be embalmed, of all then on earth? No other nation, as such, then or since, embalmed their
dead. Why was it, that the children of Ham alone did this? Except but for the reason that God, foreseeing the disputes
to arise about the negro, and that Ham would be slandered and held to be the progenitor of the negro; that, therefore, in
vindication of him, as belonging to the white race, and as an immortal being, and not of the beasts that perish, God
caused these descendants of Ham to embalm their dead, and to continue doing so for many centuries. No other valid
reason can be assigned, why these people of Mizraim, alone of all the nations of the earth, did so. There may have
been, and doubtless there were, many reasons with the people, of a private and personal character, inciting them to do
so; but this was God's reason, and he chose these personal considerations of the people, as his means of
accomplishing it.
We have shown conclusively: 1. That Ham's descendants now on earth, in Egypt, in India, all over Asia, a portion of
Africa and Europe respectively, have, this day, long, straight hair, high foreheads, high noses and thin lips—that they
have ever been so; this, all history in the Bible, and all history outside of the Bible, fully attest. 2. While, on the other
hand, all history tells us (when it says anything about them), that the negro race is kinky-headed, low forehead, flat nose,
thick lip and black skin; that he has always been so, and the negro of this day attests that he is so yet; and that,
consequently, he is in no way related to Ham, even by a curse, for he is black, and Ham is white. 3. That the
descendants of Shem and Japheth are white, and have always been white, none dispute. 4. That, having established,
then, that Shem, Ham and Japheth were perfect in their genealogies from Adam and Eve; that they were the children of
one father and one mother; that they were born about a hundred years before the flood; that their wives, like
themselves, were perfect in their genealogies; that these brothers and their descendants, as regards their genealogy,
were the perfect equals of each other; that the curse of Noah, even if directed against Ham, and which it is not, that it is
impossible that that curse could, in any way, make him the father or progenitor of the present negroes—as no curse
denounced by God himself, by patriarch or by prophet, had ever done so before or since, and there is nothing in the
language used by Noah that covers that idea; that, on the contrary, the exact word used by Noah, had been before
used by God and by patriarchs, without the slightest suspicion being excited that such was its effect on the person so
cursed; that it was not found in Ham's name, and that the effort to connect the color of the negro with the meaning of
Ham's name in Hebrew, is a mere fancy, not of the strength even of a cobweb. Now, reader, are these things true?
Look into your Bible—look into contemporaneous and concurrent history—look at existing facts outside of the Bible,
and running from the flood down to the present day, and hear the prophet of God defiantly ask, Can the Ethiopian
change his skin, or the leopard his spots?—both beasts; and when you have so looked, you will say, true, every word,
indubitably true! Then, what? One word more, before we proceed further. The embalming of Ham's dead and the
Jewish genealogical tables ceased at about the same time, and by God's interposing power. Each were permitted by
God to continue as national records—the one to show the genealogy of Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah, the
other to show that Ham was white, and not the progenitor of the negro; and each having accomplished the end
designed, God permitted them to cease, and both ceased about the same time. Is not this embalming, then, in effect, the
direct testimony of God himself, that Ham and his children were of the white race, and that there is an importance in
being of the white race, and which we will see by and by, and beyond any appreciation ever given to it heretofore?
And is it not equally God's testimony, ipso facto, that the negro race have always existed as we have it now, and as
have those of the three brothers equally always existed, and as we have them now?
But, reader, suppose we admit, for the sake of the argument, that Ham was black, and that he was made so by the
curse of his father Noah—we say, suppose we were to admit this, then what follows? Ham would have been just such
[Pg 17]
[Pg 18]
[Pg 19]
a negro as we now find on earth—admitted; but then he would have been the only negro on earth. Where was his
negro wife to be had? He could not propagate the negro race, by a cross with the white woman; for that would have
produced a mulatto, and not the negro, such as we now have. To propagate the negro that we now have on earth, the
man and the woman must both be negroes. Now, where did Ham's negro wife come from? She did not come out of
the ark? She was not on earth? Do we not see clearly from this statement of facts, that the assumption of the learned
world, even admitting it, destroys itself the moment that we bring it to the test of facts. Under no view of their
assumptions can the negro we now have on earth be accounted for.
These things being so, now what? We proceed with our subject. It being shown to be incontestibly true, that the three
brothers, Shem, Ham and Japheth, when they came out of the ark, were each of the white race, and that they have
continued so to the present day in their posterity—this is incontestible, and being true, it settles the question, that
Ham is not the progenitor of the negro, and we must now look to some other quarter for the negro's origin. As the
negro is not the progeny of Ham, as has been demonstrated, and knowing that he is of neither family of Shem or
Japheth, who are white, straight haired, etc., and the negro we have now on earth, is kinky-headed and black, by this
logic of facts we know, that he came out of the ark, and is a totally different race of men from the three brothers.
How did he get in there, and in what station or capacity? We answer, that he went into the ark by command of God;
and as he was neither Noah, nor one of his sons, all of whom were white, then, by the logic of facts, he could only
enter it as a beast, and along with the beasts. This logic of facts will not allow this position to be questioned. But we
will state it in another way equally true, from which the same result must necessarily follow, that the negro entered the
ark only as a beast. All candid or uncandid men will admit that the negro of the present day, have kinky heads, flat
nose, thick lip and black skin, and which we have shown is not true of either Shem, Ham or Japheth's progeny of this
day, and consequently it is impossible that either of them could be, or could have been, the progenitor of the negro, at
or since the flood, for each race exists now, the one white and the other black; and then, as it is impossible to believe
that the negro was created at or since the flood, therefore, he must have been in the ark. This being so, now let us see
what God said to Noah in proof of this position. He told Noah that he intended to destroy the world by a flood, but that
he intended to save him and his wife, and his three sons and their wives. These were all God intended to save, for they
had souls and beasts have not. God told him he must prepare an ark, into which besides his family, he must also take
of every beast after his kind, and all cattle after their kind, and of every creeping thing that creepeth on the earth, and
every fowl after his kind, and every bird after his sort, and food for their support. Thus did Noah, and thus by God's
command he entered the Ark with his family. God promised Noah to save him and his family—but God did not
promise to save the beasts, etc., although he preserved them in the ark; but, besides this preservation, Noah and his
family were to be saved—why, we will see presently. Then, Ham, not being the father of the negro, the negro must
have come out of the ark with the beasts, and as one, for he was not one of Noah's family that entered it. This is
inevitable, and can not be shaken by all the reasonings of men on earth to the contrary. Now, unless it can be shown
that, from Noah back to Adam and Eve, that in some way this kinky-headed and black-skinned negro is the progeny of
Adam and Eve, and which we know can not be done, then again it follows, indubitably, that the negro is not a human
being—not being of Adam's race. This point we will now examine and settle, and then account for the negro being here.
Noah was the tenth in generation from Adam and Eve. We have before shown that the descendants of Shem, Ham and
Japheth, at this day, are white—have been so from the flood, with long, straight hair, etc. This fact establishes another
fact, viz: that Noah was also white, with long, straight hair, etc. The Bible tells us that Noah was perfect in his
genealogy, and the tenth in descent from Adam and Eve; that, consequently, Adam and Eve were white—with long,
straight hair, high foreheads, high noses and thin lips. Our Saviour was also white, and his genealogy is traced, family by
family, back to Adam and Eve—which again establishes the fact that Adam and Eve were white. We have also shown
that the negro did not descend from either of the sons of Noah. That he is now here on earth, none will deny; and being
here now, this logic of facts proves that he was in the ark, and came out of the ark after the flood; and that it indubitably
follows, from the necessities of the case, that he entered the ark as a beast, and only as a beast. Now, it is very plain,
from this statement, that as he came out of the Ark, the negro, as we now know him, existed anterior to the flood, and
just such a negro as we have now, with his kinky head, flat nose, black skin, etc.; and that, Noah and his wife being
white, and perfect in their genealogy, it establishes that Adam and Eve were white; and no mesalliance having taken
place from Adam to Noah, by which the negro could be produced, that, therefore, as neither of the sons of Noah, nor
Noah himself, nor Adam and Eve, ever could by any possibility be, either of them, the progenitor of the negro, that,
therefore, it follows, from this logic of facts, that the negro is a separate and distinct species of the genus homo from
Adam and Eve, and being distinct from them, that it unquestionably follows that the negro was created before...
